Does french is the least romance language!?

fab   Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:51 pm GMT
" The phonology of French is so unlike that of its sister languages, that is almost completely unintelligible to other Romance speakers. "

la fonologia del frances es diferente, pero de que ?
El catalan tiene una fonologia muy diferente de la del Espanol tambien - y no hablar del Rumeno...
Pienso que cada idioma latino tiene sus propias caracteristicas. El frances tiene muchos accentos muy diferentes entre si. El accento suizo tiene un sonido y ritmo muy alemanico, mientras que el accento del sur de francia es "cantante" como el italiano.


" I speak Spanish as a second language, and I can communicate fairly well with Italian speakers, but French speakers, I have trouble understanding."

Quizas es porque no te gusta el frances que tienes dificultades hacer esfuersos ?




" Many of the vowels at the end of words in French go unpronounced, or are simply non-existent, while the majority of Spanish/Italian words have vowels at the end, and are also pronounced, giving them a certain rythym. "

Si es verdad, los finales de las palabras son lo que da al frances una apparencia diferente del Espanol y del Italiano.
Pero no es un caso unico dentro de las lenguas romances. El catalan tambien ha perdido mucho de sus "o" al final. es tambien el caso del occitan y de algunos dialectos Italianos. En portugues, muchos de los finales de palabras no son prononciados tambien.
Benjamin   Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:52 pm GMT
Although 'to be' is the only verb which can never use the do/does/did thing, it is also optional in the verbs 'to have' and 'to dare' and possibly some others. You also don't use it with auxiliary verbs such as 'can', 'will', 'shall', 'must', 'ought' etc.

I don't know where it comes from though.
LAA   Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:05 pm GMT
"mientras que el accento del sur de francia es "cantante" como el italiano"

No sabia que mi amigo. Muy interesante. El sur es mas "Romano/Latino".

"Si es verdad, los finales de las palabras son lo que da al frances una apparencia diferente del Espanol y del Italiano."

Para la mayor parte, esto es verdad, si.

"Quizas es porque no te gusta el frances que tienes dificultades hacer esfuersos ?"

No, en absoluto. Me gusta frances tambien. Es mas diferente justo.
fab   Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:16 pm GMT
" No, en absoluto. Me gusta frances tambien. Es mas diferente justo. "



Dudo un poco de esto... Me recuerdo hacia algunas semanas unos de tus "posts" muy agressivos al contro del idioma frances.
Quizas has cambiado tu mente, si es el caso estoy feliz para ti que te abres a una cultura nueva !
LAA   Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:24 pm GMT
"Dudo un poco de esto... Me recuerdo hacia algunas semanas unos de tus "posts" muy agressivos al contro del idioma frances.
Quizas has cambiado tu mente, si es el caso estoy feliz para ti que te abres a una cultura nueva ! "

Nunca he sido contra-frances. Estoy apesadumbrado que usted ha tenido esa impresion. He estado intentando decir esto a usted en ingles durante mucho tiempo.
Georgero   Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:31 am GMT
@fab
Romanian phonology is not different from other Romance languages. By contrary, it is almost identical to Italian, the only difference is that Romanians use a phonetic alhabet which makes words a bit difficult to read by non-Romanian speakers.
Actually I was surprised to see that some Catalan words are similar, even identical with Romanian once:

For example:

Italian-Romanian-Catalan
tutti-toţi-tots
questa-acesta-aquesta
pottere-poţi-pots
giocco-joc-joc
nuovo-nou-nou
pilota-palla-pilotă (different sense though)

*ţ = ts
Georgero   Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:32 am GMT
Edit:

last line should be, of course:
palla-pilota-pilotă
greg   Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:53 am GMT
LAA : « The phonology of French is so unlike that of its sister languages, that is almost completely unintelligible to other Romance speakers. »

Encore une fois, ton inconscient associe la néolatinophonie avec l'hispanocastillanophonie et l'italotoscanophonie. Tu oublies peut-être le lombard, le piedmontais, le ligure, le gascon, le provençal, le languedocien, l'auvergnat, le poitevin, le wallon, le francoprovençal (arpitan), le rhétoroman et j'en passe...
LAA   Tue Jul 11, 2006 4:25 pm GMT
If you're telling me to not forget about the other minor Romance languages like Catalan and Provencal, then my answer is this. I am only referring to the major Romance languages, known throughout the world, and outside of the respective countries. So for the sake of this discussion, I'm talking about the standard languages of each country. So, for Spain, it would be Castillian. For French it would be the standard language of Ille de Paris, and so on. So I'm referring to Italian, Romanian, Spanish, French, and Portuguese.
Guest   Tue Jul 11, 2006 5:04 pm GMT
« Ille de Paris » !!!...


Franchement, c'est trop indigent pour valoir une réfutation...
fab   Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:15 pm GMT
Je pense que fondementalement LAA associe la notion de latinité (qu'il s'agisse de la langue, de la culture ou de l'"etnicité") avec le monde hispanophone, et en particulier avec le monde hispanophone qu'il connait, c'est à dire l'hispanophonie d'Amerique latine.

C'est ce qui le dérange tellement dans le fait de considérer le Français comme une langue latin à part entière et les Français comme un peuple latin à part entière... C'est que la France diverge assez profondement de l'Amérique hispanophone en terme de culture ou d'"ethnie", en particulier celle d'Amerique centrale et des caraibes.
Ce qu'il n'arrive sans doute pas à comprendre c'est que cette partie du monde latin diverge aussi assez profondement de l'Europe latine, et de l'Espagne en particulier. En ce qui concerne l'Espagne, sa (ses) langue(s) sa culture et sa population ont, comme la France, aussi considérablement varié par rapport à l'époque romaine, dans une direction propre à l'Espagne.
LAA   Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:20 pm GMT
En Anglais por favor. Translation anyone? Even Spanish will do. But dear God, I don't understand French. I will be more than happy to practice French with you Fab, as long as you keep it elementary.
LAA   Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:33 pm GMT
Correct me if I'm wrong Fab, but you are basically saying that I'm Latin-America centric. At least that is what I think you were saying in your French post. That is not true. I realize that large parts of Latin-America have Amerindian and Afro influence. But the culture of much of Latin-America is very similar to that of Spain.

You should read up on what a lot of Spanish actors/actresses like Antonio Banderas, Penelope Cruz, and Raz Vega say about playing Latin-American roles. When asked if it was hard to play the role of someone from a Latin-American culture, they said that it wasn't a challenge at all, because Spanish culture is so similar to Latin (Hispanic) American culture.

I don't know Fab. But from a Mexican point of view, a large part of one's culture is defined by the disposition and temperment of the people. One of the main differences we see between ourselves and Anglos is the passion and the warmth we posess, whereas the Anglos are more reserved people, who don't show as much affection. Perhaps that is why I don't tend to associate the French with the Spaniards and Italians as much as I do the latter.

My mother is always warning me not to marry a Northern European woman, because "they are cold, they are not cultured, they can't cook as good, they're poor lovers, and bad mothers."
Guest   Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:06 pm GMT
Benjamin: << Although 'to be' is the only verb which can never use the do/does/did thing, it is also optional in the verbs 'to have' and 'to dare' and possibly some others. You also don't use it with auxiliary verbs such as 'can', 'will', 'shall', 'must', 'ought' etc. >>

What do you mean it's optional with those verbs? All I can think of with "have" is when it's being used as an auxillary ("Have you been to the park?" rather than "Did you have been to the park?"), when it shouldn't be used at all; not sure what you mean with the "dare" bit. You DO use "to be" with auxillary verbs, e.g. "You ought to be happier". Also you can use "do" with "to be" when it's in the form of the imperative, e.g. "don't be so glum".
zxczxc   Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:07 pm GMT
Benjamin: << Although 'to be' is the only verb which can never use the do/does/did thing, it is also optional in the verbs 'to have' and 'to dare' and possibly some others. You also don't use it with auxiliary verbs such as 'can', 'will', 'shall', 'must', 'ought' etc. >>

What do you mean it's optional with those verbs? All I can think of with "have" is when it's being used as an auxillary ("Have you been to the park?" rather than "Did you have been to the park?"), when it shouldn't be used at all; not sure what you mean with the "dare" bit. You DO use "to be" with auxillary verbs, e.g. "You ought to be happier". Also you can use "do" with "to be" when it's in the form of the imperative, e.g. "don't be so glum".